A Question About Electromagnetism

[DrmDoc]

I was reading an article on the physics of the attractive force between electron and nucleus. It explained how physicist believe that the attraction is maintained by an exchange of positive and negatively charged photons between the nucleus and electron. Given this electromagnetic attraction my question is, what is the force that keeps these particles at such a vast subatomic distance and not collide because of this strong attraction? Is it the force generated by the collision between the oppositely charge photons or some other unknown force? I welcome your insight.

[EdEarl]

I don't know the answer to your question, but photons have no charge.

[swansont]

As EdEarl notes, photons are not charged, so it is likely you misread the article. Can you link to it?

 

The electromagnetic interaction is mediated by an exchange of these these uncharged photons. Collisions are not an issue. Photons easily pass right through each other.

[DrmDoc]

I don't know the answer to your question, but photons have no charge.

 

Thank you EdEarl for your response and insight. It seems I misread the article as swansont said.

 

As EdEarl notes, photons are not charged, so it is likely you misread the article. Can you link to it?

 

The electromagnetic interaction is mediated by an exchange of these these uncharged photons. Collisions are not an issue. Photons easily pass right through each other.

 

I reviewed the article and you are quite right; indeed, I did misread it. It states that the oppositely charged electron and nucleus absorbs each others photonic emissions and that is what maintains their attraction. Indeed, as you said, collision is not an issue between photons in this exchange. However, is there any explanation as to why electron and nucleus remain so distant? Why doesn't their attraction pull them closer or into the other? Is it, perhaps, a wave effect of their photonic emissions? Again, I welcome and appreciate your insight.

[EdEarl]

Since swansont did not answer your why question, I'll risk saying physics often cannot answer why, and this may be one of those cases. The properties of electrons have been measured, including size. However, electrons are smaller than the best measurement efforts have determined. Some believe they are point particles or strings with size of Planck length; thus, they cannot be directly observed. Some things about electrons are unknown, and your question may be one.

[DrmDoc]

Since swansont did not answer your why question, I'll risk saying physics often cannot answer why, and this may be one of those cases. The properties of electrons have been measured, including size. However, electrons are smaller than the best measurement efforts have determined. Some believe they are point particles or strings with size of Planck length; thus, they cannot be directly observed. Some things about electrons are unknown, and your question may be one.

Thanks again, EdEarl. I am clearly a novice on this subject, as I am on so many. Yet, it is a fascinating study. Thank you.

[Moreno]

I was reading an article on the physics of the attractive force between electron and nucleus. It explained how physicist believe that the attraction is maintained by an exchange of positive and negatively charged photons between the nucleus and electron. Given this electromagnetic attraction my question is, what is the force that keeps these particles at such a vast subatomic distance and not collide because of this strong attraction? Is it the force generated by the collision between the oppositely charge photons or some other unknown force? I welcome your insight.

Electrons can't be compared to a planets which rotate around the star. They have dual wave-particulate nature. They can't be strictly visualised as a balls which rotate around something. "Orbits" of electrons is rather special quantum energy states they are capable to attain. Sometimes electrons can "collide" and "fuse together" with protons. What you get is neutrons or neutron matter (in big quantities). Search "neutron stars".

Edited January 5, 2016 by Moreno

[swansont]

However, is there any explanation as to why electron and nucleus remain so distant? Why doesn't their attraction pull them closer or into the other? Is it, perhaps, a wave effect of their photonic emissions? Again, I welcome and appreciate your insight.

As Moreno has noted, these aren't planetary-like orbits. The QM solution shows that electrons spend some of their time in and around the nucleus — the probability of finding the electron there is not zero. They don't normally stay there, because that's not an allowed state of the system. The reaction where the electron combines with a proton can't proceed if it's not energetically allowed.

[DrmDoc]

As Moreno has noted, these aren't planetary-like orbits. The QM solution shows that electrons spend some of their time in and around the nucleus — the probability of finding the electron there is not zero. They don't normally stay there, because that's not an allowed state of the system. The reaction where the electron combines with a proton can't proceed if it's not energetically allowed.

I've often heard the atom described as a nucleus surrounded by a "cloud" of electrons. Until now, I was unaware that electrons do penetrate their nucleus but don't remain there. Until that article, I was unaware that the space between electron and nucleus is not empty but is filled with waves of photonic emissions. So, in reality, the electromagnetic force that maintain our cohesion fills the empty spaces between atoms. Therefore, it is a misconception to perceive the molecules of matter as mainly comprised of empty space, correct? Further still, does the size of this photonic field between particles suggest that matter is mainly comprised of photonic emissions? Would this make photons the most abundant subatomic particle of matter? I've been enlightened by yours, Moreno, and EdEarl's insight and I appreciate your continued indulgence.

[Strange]

I've often heard the atom described as a nucleus surrounded by a "cloud" of electrons.

 

 

And, even more, each electron is really a "cloud" as well. They exist as "orbitals" which have all sorts of wacky shapes:

 

Therefore, it is a misconception to perceive the molecules of matter as mainly comprised of empty space, correct?

 

I would agree, yes.

 

Further still, does the size of this photonic field between particles suggest that matter is mainly comprised of photonic emissions? Would this make photons the most abundant subatomic particle of matter?

 

Certainly they are mainly comprised of electromagnetic fields. But note that the photons here are "virtual photons" so they don't exist in the same sense that the photons that make up a beam of light do. They are (or they might be) just a mathematical abstraction.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Strange

[swansont]

Further still, does the size of this photonic field between particles suggest that matter is mainly comprised of photonic emissions? Would this make photons the most abundant subatomic particle of matter?

 

As Strange points out, these are virtual particles, so "comprised" really isn't the proper notion here. The details of the quantum mechanics involved is pretty weird, if you're only used to classical physics, and classical descriptions don't really capture what's going on.

[DrmDoc]

And, even more, each electron is really a "cloud" as well. They exist as "orbitals" which have all sorts of wacky shapes:

 

 

I would agree, yes.

 

 

Certainly they are mainly comprised of electromagnetic fields. But note that the photons here are "virtual photons" so they don't exist in the same sense that the photons that make up a beam of light do. They are (or they might be) just a mathematical abstraction.

 

 

As Strange points out, these are virtual particles, so "comprised" really isn't the proper notion here. The details of the quantum mechanics involved is pretty weird, if you're only used to classical physics, and classical descriptions don't really capture what's going on.

 

I see; virtual particles not necessarily photons in the classical sense. So, if I now understand correctly, a field of photon-like particles, as quantum mathematics infer or conclude, maintains the attraction between atomic particles. Also, it isn't proper to think of that field as we might a field of light photons? I know that things get weird the deeper we peer, which isn't comforting but remains so very fascinating. Thank you Strange and swansont for sharing your insights.